It would make monitory not required. I have never been on a system where inetd failed ... so why monitor? E
VICS, LLC Eric S Eberhard 2933 W Middle Verde Rd Camp Verde, AZ 86322 928-567-3727 (land line) 928-301-7537 (cell phone) http://www.vicsmba.com https://www.facebook.com/groups/286143052248115 -----Original Message----- From: Peter Pentchev <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2021 1:06 PM To: Eberhard <[email protected]> Cc: 'Jorge Redondo Flames' <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [stunnel-users] Re: Fwd: Re: Local socket keeps listening On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 09:42:41AM -0700, Eberhard wrote: > I’ll toss in an unpopular opinion here. I have used stunnel since day > one. I had over the years problems with it not answering or the > parent process dying altogether and other issues. I finally decided > to run it from inetd rather than as a service. It is logical that > this is a little slower but with modern machines I don’t notice it. > inetd always is running. Always. If it is not you pretty much cannot > use the machine. It has been a service program forever and is dead reliable. > What you get is total reliability for an unnoticeable loss of speed. > I suppose a heavily loaded machine running at capacity might not like > this – my answer is throw hardware at it. I need reliable more than > anything else. I’d at least try it! Um. Did you read the original message in this thread? How exactly could inetd possibly help with the monitoring problem? G'luck, Peter -- Peter Pentchev [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc Key fingerprint 2EE7 A7A5 17FC 124C F115 C354 651E EFB0 2527 DF13 _______________________________________________ stunnel-users mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
